Despite heavy external pressure and attempts by local pro-China groups to create problems, President Chen Shui-bian (陳水扁) has decided to abolish the National Unification Council (NUC) and the unification guidelines.
When Chen received Republican Representative Robert Simmons of Connecticut, he said the council was "an absurd product of an absurd era" and that it violates the spirit of democracy.
Since the Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) has already modified its stance by saying that Taiwanese independence is one of the public's options, it is only sensible that the council and the guidelines be abolished.
At that meeting, Chen also said that the "1992 consensus" was a lie.
He said that over the past few years, Taiwan's opposition parties, China and the US have again and again demanded the acceptance of the "1992 consensus." Now former Mainland Affairs Council chairman and KMT Legislator Su Chi (
Chen also accused the KMT and the Chinese Communist Party of cheating the world on the matter. When KMT Chairman Ma Ying-jeou, (
Chen's courage in pushing for the abolition of the council and the guidelines is significant.
The change of power in 2000 was an excellent opportunity for Taiwan to become a normal country.
But the new government only made tiny steps in this direction due to restrictions imposed by the "four noes" and the "1992 consensus."
Binding itself hand and foot to these ideas, the government also adopted the policy of opening up Chinese trade, which resulted in an outflow of capital, technology and skills.
So, on the one hand, Taiwan has been prepared to strike compromises and humiliate itself, and on the other it has opened the door and welcomed the bandits inside.
It is a situation that has proved difficult to undo.
The tragic thing is that Taiwanese know they have been wronged, but are unable to put things right.
Taiwan's promise to abide by the "four noes" was never going to convince China to abandon the threat to invade. Instead, there was a rapid increase in the number of missiles pointed in this direction and the passage of the "Anti-Secession" Law.
Since China does not intend to give up the option of military action, there is no need to stick to any pledge.
Chen's efforts to abolish the council and guidelines does not violate the "four noes" pledge anyway. He is only terminating the operation of a government agency and a doctrine that has not been convened or invoked in six years.
As Chen's proposal only requires an administrative procedure, how is it going to aggravate cross-strait tensions?
The reason cross-strait relations have not improved is because China does not want to renounce force, nor is it willing to treat Taiwan on an equal footing. Taiwan receives no goodwill from across the Strait.
It is China that is attempting to alter the cross-strait status quo and blame Taiwan for escalating cross-strait tensions.
There is now a clear consensus in Taiwan that only Taiwanese may determine the nation's future. The KMT, whose stated goal is unification, has also recently shifted its stance. However, the guidelines see unification as the only option.
Doing away with a government agency and its ossified doctrine of inferiority is not only the best way of asserting our self-belief, but is also a reflection of mainstream opinion.
That is to say, no one has the right to determine Taiwan's future other than Taiwanese themselves.
When Taiwanese and Chinese representatives met in Hong Kong in 1992, the latter insisted on the "one China" principle, while the KMT negotiators demanded that each side be allowed to make its own interpretation of the principle.
No consensus was reached. Beijing's rejection of any consensus has now been verified by Su, who admits to having made the whole thing up. The consensus was therefore a scam orchestrated by the KMT.
The DPP has spent six years looking for new directions for the nation's future. It has now come to its senses, and has chosen to return to the path of Taiwanese consciousness.
It must be stated that Chen has faced tremendous pressure from the US over this development. He certainly needs to resolve tensions with the US and improve communication with Washington.
But abolishing the council and guidelines is the correct move, and having decided to do so Chen must hold firm.
TRANSLATED BY PERRY SVENSSON AND DANIEL CHENG
US President Donald Trump has gotten off to a head-spinning start in his foreign policy. He has pressured Denmark to cede Greenland to the United States, threatened to take over the Panama Canal, urged Canada to become the 51st US state, unilaterally renamed the Gulf of Mexico to “the Gulf of America” and announced plans for the United States to annex and administer Gaza. He has imposed and then suspended 25 percent tariffs on Canada and Mexico for their roles in the flow of fentanyl into the United States, while at the same time increasing tariffs on China by 10
As an American living in Taiwan, I have to confess how impressed I have been over the years by the Chinese Communist Party’s wholehearted embrace of high-speed rail and electric vehicles, and this at a time when my own democratic country has chosen a leader openly committed to doing everything in his power to put obstacles in the way of sustainable energy across the board — and democracy to boot. It really does make me wonder: “Are those of us right who hold that democracy is the right way to go?” Has Taiwan made the wrong choice? Many in China obviously
US President Donald Trump last week announced plans to impose reciprocal tariffs on eight countries. As Taiwan, a key hub for semiconductor manufacturing, is among them, the policy would significantly affect the country. In response, Minister of Economic Affairs J.W. Kuo (郭智輝) dispatched two officials to the US for negotiations, and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co’s (TSMC) board of directors convened its first-ever meeting in the US. Those developments highlight how the US’ unstable trade policies are posing a growing threat to Taiwan. Can the US truly gain an advantage in chip manufacturing by reversing trade liberalization? Is it realistic to
About 6.1 million couples tied the knot last year, down from 7.28 million in 2023 — a drop of more than 20 percent, data from the Chinese Ministry of Civil Affairs showed. That is more serious than the precipitous drop of 12.2 percent in 2020, the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. As the saying goes, a single leaf reveals an entire autumn. The decline in marriages reveals problems in China’s economic development, painting a dismal picture of the nation’s future. A giant question mark hangs over economic data that Beijing releases due to a lack of clarity, freedom of the press
RSS